No. I would not have happily plunked down the cash for it. I thought it was overpriced already but WAS considering buying until 'The fix,' -

I'm not going to buy that house with the light leak in the kitchen, either.

Wow, that is one heck of a kitchen you expected to be built. I was unaware that they could design them to be light-proof. Same with Canon cameras, I guess.

Way beneath even you, Neuro.

Regardless.

YOU GUYS WIN.

I SURRENDER.

HERE IS ME, FALLING ON MY SWORD:

1. CANON HAS ENGINEERED THE BEST CAMERA IN THE WORLD.2. CANONRUMORS ISN'T FULL OF FANBOYS.3. NO ONE ON THIS SITE EVERY FLAMES FOR OPINIONS DETRIMENTAL TO CANON, AS ALTERNATE OPINIONS AND PERCEPTIONS ARE ALWAYS WELCOME.

Signed,

you can all go to hell.

C'ya...or not.

My such anger. Most of the people responding were trying to state the obvious, that this light leak is really a non-issue.

Logged

Happy owner of the 5D Mark IV, 24-105 f/4L and other L & third party lenses

The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape. Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care. But now I KNOW. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape. Thank you very much.

Tape is used EVERYWHERE and the only ignorance is turning a blind eye to see that it is the solution. MacBook Pro's use tape to keep cables and connectors in place. (sorry - hope you're not using a MacBook steven63)

The point is that the camera isn't FIXED by tape, it is IMPROVED. People bought the camera and realized that it doesn't take AMAZING pictures all by itself and they still had to do it manually, so they were hoping for a quick and easy refund, but Canon taped that hole closed and now they're upset

I have no doubt tape is used in the example you've given. But from my perspective it is because that is the way they are engineered. The tape is 'worked into' the original design for a specific purpose. In the case of the 5dmiii the tape is not part of the original design. It's simply a fix (and I think a temporary one) to a problem that, while very small to begin with, Canon felt it needed to be addressed. Personally, I think the fix is simply a bandaid to the issue - it was never designed to be that way. Canon will, I am sure, engineer the proper solution eventually. Until then, I'm not a buyer.

In which way is this a temporary fix? Canon did not feel the need to address it, they did it because they care. There was nothing wrong, but Canon gave a solution to the cries about a non-issue. The US spent thousands of dollars on developing a pen that can write in space and the Russians simply took a pencil... Expensive stuff isn't always better - something that works and gets the job done is all that is needed.

The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape. Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care. But now I KNOW. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape. Thank you very much.

Tape is used EVERYWHERE and the only ignorance is turning a blind eye to see that it is the solution. MacBook Pro's use tape to keep cables and connectors in place. (sorry - hope you're not using a MacBook steven63)

The point is that the camera isn't FIXED by tape, it is IMPROVED. People bought the camera and realized that it doesn't take AMAZING pictures all by itself and they still had to do it manually, so they were hoping for a quick and easy refund, but Canon taped that hole closed and now they're upset

I have no doubt tape is used in the example you've given. But from my perspective it is because that is the way they are engineered. The tape is 'worked into' the original design for a specific purpose. In the case of the 5dmiii the tape is not part of the original design. It's simply a fix (and I think a temporary one) to a problem that, while very small to begin with, Canon felt it needed to be addressed. Personally, I think the fix is simply a bandaid to the issue - it was never designed to be that way. Canon will, I am sure, engineer the proper solution eventually. Until then, I'm not a buyer.

In which way is this a temporary fix? Canon did not feel the need to address it, they did it because they care. There was nothing wrong, but Canon gave a solution to the cries about a non-issue. The US spent thousands of dollars on developing a pen that can write in space and the Russians simply took a pencil... Expensive stuff isn't always better - something that works and gets the job done is all that is needed.

Amen

Logged

Happy owner of the 5D Mark IV, 24-105 f/4L and other L & third party lenses

Dylan

I happen to agree with Steven, and feel that you all were too harsh on him for having a sensible opinion. I think it's a shame that Canon can charge $500 more than the D800 and expect a simple tape job to make everyone happy. It's a flaw in the design of the camera, period. I would be bummed grabbing my 5D3 and thinking about a tape job fix inside the camera every time I did a shoot. It's more about principal and not about functionality. How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.

I happen to agree with Steven, and feel that you all were too harsh on him for having a sensible opinion. I think it's a shame that Canon can charge $500 more than the D800 and expect a simple tape job to make everyone happy. It's a flaw in the design of the camera, period. I would be bummed grabbing my 5D3 and thinking about a tape job fix inside the camera every time I did a shoot. It's more about principal and not about functionality. How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.

In the year 2000, Audi releaser their Audi TT car. There was one problem. When going at fast speeds the car would lift off and flip, due to it's shape resembling an airplane wing. Audi had to think of a fix. They took your car back if you wanted, and put a spoiler on it. After a while it was costing too much to take all the cars back so they sent out the repair kits. It consisted of a spoiler and two (2) pieces of 3M double sided tape. There were no more problems with the car lifting off, and the spoiler never glued off. And I'm pretty sure it was exposed to the elements as well as heat and cold.

I happen to agree with Steven, and feel that you all were too harsh on him for having a sensible opinion. I think it's a shame that Canon can charge $500 more than the D800 and expect a simple tape job to make everyone happy. It's a flaw in the design of the camera, period. I would be bummed grabbing my 5D3 and thinking about a tape job fix inside the camera every time I did a shoot. It's more about principal and not about functionality. How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.

Sure - if the lens fell off the 5DIII constantly and they stuck it on with tape there would be an issue. But the point is that the "light leak" is not an issue. The 5DIII is also not a D800... it is a 5DIII worth more than a D800. I completely agree that you would constantly think of the tape and that is why I said before - I wouldn't bother having it applied. If it is already applied... bonus.

How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.

If the headlight issue had anything to do with the wiring, I think tape would be a perfectly acceptable fix.

The tape is now part of the design to solve the light leak issue. Had Canon put this tape in at the beginning, the discussions we are having now would have been more meaningful. People are attacking each other over such a trivial thing. You are not becoming a better photographer because you are using a camera without the black tape.

The tape is now part of the design to solve the light leak issue. Had Canon put this tape in at the beginning, the discussions we are having now would have been more meaningful. People are attacking each other over such a trivial thing. You are not becoming a better photographer because you are using a camera without the black tape.

Wow, very nice link. Gives more reassurances that the camera is well put together and had significant forethought, "light leak" (non)issue aside

Logged

Happy owner of the 5D Mark IV, 24-105 f/4L and other L & third party lenses

I happen to agree with Steven, and feel that you all were too harsh on him for having a sensible opinion. I think it's a shame that Canon can charge $500 more than the D800 and expect a simple tape job to make everyone happy. It's a flaw in the design of the camera, period. I would be bummed grabbing my 5D3 and thinking about a tape job fix inside the camera every time I did a shoot. It's more about principal and not about functionality. How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.

The D800 is hardly without flaws. The list of current complaints include:

1) Oil spots on the sensor2) Fine scratches on the mirror3) Soft focusing on the left side of the frame with certain lenses while the right side of the frame is tack sharp4) Weird green tint on the LCD screen

Are any of these serious issue? Nope, but they'd annoy me a heck of a lot more than a light leak that won't actually affect any of my photos. Interestingly, the Nikon guys seem to be good sports about this, and there isn't nearly the same amount of whining as there is on CR.